In a recent decision, Judge Terrence R. Nealon of the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas addressed the parameters of permissible discovery of electronically stored information (ESI) in the title insurance dispute case of Brogan v. Rosenn, Jenkins & Greenwald, No. 08 - CV - 6048 (C.P. Lacka. Co. July 5, 2013).
In Brogan, the Plaintiffs were seeking the discovery of electronically stored information (ESI)from the title insurance company. The Plaintiffs, in part, questioned whether the carrier had produced all relevant documentation from its files. Also at issue, among other areas of dispute, was the Plaintiff's request to secure ESI pertaining to certain other documents believed to be in existence by the Plaintiffs that had not been produced by the defendant. The Plaintiff also had requests out to secure ESI on certain materials as opposed to a request for the paper form of such information. The case came before the court by way of a motion to compel filed by the Plaintiffs.
After reviewing the prerequisites for discovery of electronically stored information set forth under Pa.R.C.P. 4009.1, the court ultimately ruled that the Plaintiff's had not established an entitlement to discovery of ESI under the facts presented as applied to the proportionality standards set forth under the Rule. As such, the motion to compel was denied.
Anyone wishing to review this detailed Opinion in Brogan by Judge Nealon may click this LINK.